In the PM story, Catalyst journalist Maryanne Demasi stated that she had presented the scientific literature she was reporting on to the National Heart Foundation and “they were certainly supportive of it”.

The Editor’s Note attached to the program states that there are “clear and significant areas of disagreement” between the Catalyst episode and the Heart Foundation, and her statement was inaccurate.

While many medical experts are concerned some people who are not at high risk of heart disease - a calculation made using a number of measures including cholesterol, blood pressure, weight and smoking status - are inappropriately prescribed statins, the Catalyst episode went further than that.

The program focused heavily on the opinions of US experts - one of whom believes vaccines can cause autism and another who promotes chiropractic and chelation for heart problems - while a number of high-profile Australian experts were not used.

One, the University of Sydney head of cardiology, David Celermajer, told Fairfax Media he felt only the evidence that supported the agenda of the program was included.

''I think the decision to actually consult a wide variety of credible Australian experts and not use any of that would be explained by wanting to sell a particular version of the science,'' he said at the time.

In his statement Scott said the issue of medication use and heart disease was an important one, worthy of attention.

“I would like to see our science programs on radio and TV work together to revisit it, whilst taking absolute care to comply with our rigorous editorial policies,” he said. “The Catalyst programs were very engaging, attracted large audiences and clearly touched on an issue of importance to many Australians.”